Can sin be rationalized away?

[Guest shiloh357]

Here, I'll add some more of my "sloppy theology"

I think if you refuse/don't see, that something is a sin, BUT you are honestly, truly and prayerfully turning your life over to Christ, and wanting to live in a way that is pleasing to Him, then HE will convict you of it in His time, not mans.

And Again, that applies to sanctification, not to someone who living in aberrant sin and refuses the moral authority of Scripture to define what sin is. Yes the Holy Spirit convicts, but the Holy Spirit's ability to convict is predicated on a person's willlingness to submit to God's authority as a moral lawgiver and to the moral authority of the Word of God.

Turning to Christ means to turn from sin. To argue that a person can love Christ, but live in sin is a nonstarter. It would be equivalent to saying that a man could be married but still sleep with other women on the grounds he refuses to acknowledge the exclusivity of the marriage covenant. If a man told his wife or prospective wife that he simply did not see anything wrong with having sex with other women how long would she remain his wife? Would she marry him in the first place?

We don't manage our personal relationships in the manner you suggest. Why do you think it would work that way with God? How long is God expected to compromise His holiness?

A person can live in aberrant sin, OR they can be a Christian. They cannot have it both ways. If a person can enter the Kingdom of God while living in abberant sin, on what moral basis would they be "convicted" that it is wrong?

I am sorry Scarlet, but your position simply doesnt' hold up against the Scripture's message of repentance.

[Fiosh]

When we look at the Law at full strength and its impossible demands honestly we can never say that we probably are sinning. The Christian life is one of constant repentance. Law keeping is simply not possible. That idea is the heresy of Pelagianism. As sinners we always fall into denial about the sins we commit in thought, word and deed whether it be through the negative prohibitions or the positive requirements of the Law. We cannot even begin to identify the specific ways in which we fail to keep the Law each minute of our existance. Frankly any discussion of this type that fails to understand that is a total delusion in itself.

sw

It all hinges on the development of one's conscience. If I may borrow from the Catechism:

IV. ERRONEOUS JUDGMENT

1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin." In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one's passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church's authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.

1794 A good and pure conscience is enlightened by true faith, for charity proceeds at the same time "from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith."

The more a correct conscience prevails, the more do persons and groups turn aside from blind choice and try to be guided by objective standards of moral conduct.

[Scarletprayers]

Here, I'll add some more of my "sloppy theology"

I think if you refuse/don't see, that something is a sin, BUT you are honestly, truly and prayerfully turning your life over to Christ, and wanting to live in a way that is pleasing to Him, then HE will convict you of it in His time, not mans.

And Again, that applies to sanctification, not to someone who living in aberrant sin and refuses the moral authority of Scripture to define what sin is. Yes the Holy Spirit convicts, but the Holy Spirit's ability to convict is predicated on a person's willlingness to submit to God's authority as a moral lawgiver and to the moral authority of the Word of God.

Turning to Christ means to turn from sin. To argue that a person can love Christ, but live in sin is a nonstarter. It would be equivalent to saying that a man could be married but still sleep with other women on the grounds he refuses to acknowledge the exclusivity of the marriage covenant. If a man told his wife or prospective wife that he simply did not see anything wrong with having sex with other women how long would she remain his wife? Would she marry him in the first place?

We don't manage our personal relationships in the manner you suggest. Why do you think it would work that way with God? How long is God expected to compromise His holiness?

A person can live in aberrant sin, OR they can be a Christian. They cannot have it both ways. If a person can enter the Kingdom of God while living in abberant sin, on what moral basis would they be "convicted" that it is wrong?

I am sorry Scarlet, but your position simply doesnt' hold up against the Scripture's message of repentance.

But, I still sin everyday...........I guess I'm just not getting it, I must admit I feel pretty stupid right now. What is the difference between me knowingly sinning and a person who has not been convicted yet, that what they are doing is a sin??? Is mine not the "greater" sin, since I know it is and yet continue to do it????? Actually after that last line, I feel like I'm talking about 2 different things.............................yes, very stupid right now.

[Fiosh]

RE: "those in the sloppy theology camp "

reported to mods

[Fiosh]

Yes the Holy Spirit convicts, but the Holy Spirit's ability to convict is predicated on a person's willlingness to submit to God's authority as a moral lawgiver and to the moral authority of the Word of God.

Here's where you are making you mistake, Shiloh. You assume that yours is the only right and true interpretation of Holy Scripture. (For the record, I know of at least one major error you have in your theology.)

However, even though I know you are right in this case---that the homosexual lifestyle is sin and an abomination---not everyone sees it that way. A person with a mal-formed conscience can, for a time (and I say "for a time"), be unable to see their sin.

This is not an unwillingness "to submit to God's authority as a moral lawgiver and to the moral authority of the Word of God." It is ignorance.

Which may change to rationalization, and then eventually to a realization and conviction.

[EricH]

All people have a tremendous ability to rationalize. A case in point is the way people treat each other here on the boards. They attempt to excuse treating people rudely by saying they are "defending the honor of God". So they end up breaking God's commandments regarding how we are to treat others to defend Him

[firehill]

I think it is important to understand HOW the idea of rationalizing sin away was being used in the other thread. Unfortunately, firehill fails to do a very good of job of providing the context in which the phrase was used.

It is not important to understand how the idea of rationalizing away sin was being used in the other thread because the sense that you used over there is not the sense being used in this OP. I'm not speaking of the sense you provided below:

The argumet being made is that since a homosexual acknowledges that we no longer stone adulterers and idolaters or own slaves and that since there are a host of other OT commandments that do not apply to us in this day and age, that it justifies their rejection of homosexuality. In that sense they are "rationalizing" that homosexuality is not really sin and that the commandments of concerning homosexuality have no moral authority over us today.

The issue being debated is whether or not a person can be a practising homosexual and at the same be considered a full brother or sister in Christ even if they fail to recognize that homosexuality is a sin. Unfortunate those in the sloppy theology camp are asserting that a person can live in that lifestyle and be "just as Christian as you and I" even if they rationalize that it is not sin. It is being portrayed as "sinning in ignorance."

That is not the issue being debated here.

We don't need to debate that issue over on this thread; I am just providing some context to firehill's question that she should have provided herself.

You've provided the wrong context.

[firehill]

I brought this idea over from another thread titled, 'Naming the Name of Christ, And Wickedness'

Can it without being in opposition to logic therefore in the absolute sense? Can sin be rationalized away? Can the breaking of God's Law be rationalized away by a christian at some point in their sanctification process?

LOL!

Are you serious? I would like to know of one Christian that does NOT rationalize away sin in their life. Who among us either keeps the Law perfectly or confesses perfectly each failure to do so. Have you loved God and neighbor perfectly and without failure today? If you think you have then you have major problems. If you haven't, can you even begin to identify how and when you haven't and confessed it? If you can't acknowledge that you rationalize away sin on a daily basis it indicates yet one more time that you are rationalizing away sin!

sw

You've misunderstood my OP.

[st. Worm]

I brought this idea over from another thread titled, 'Naming the Name of Christ, And Wickedness'

Can it without being in opposition to logic therefore in the absolute sense? Can sin be rationalized away? Can the breaking of God's Law be rationalized away by a christian at some point in their sanctification process?

LOL!

Are you serious? I would like to know of one Christian that does NOT rationalize away sin in their life. Who among us either keeps the Law perfectly or confesses perfectly each failure to do so. Have you loved God and neighbor perfectly and without failure today? If you think you have then you have major problems. If you haven't, can you even begin to identify how and when you haven't and confessed it? If you can't acknowledge that you rationalize away sin on a daily basis it indicates yet one more time that you are rationalizing away sin!

sw

You've misunderstood my OP.

I re-read it before posting and I don't think I did misunderstand it.

sw

[Guest Biblicist]

I think my downfall is not understanding your original question.

Maybe you could use smaller words. . .

What does, 'Can sin be rationalized away?', to you mean?

OK, what I said, then is exactly what it means to me.

If a person is rsied to think they were "born that way" is that rationalizing or is that ignorance?

I think it's important to remember Romans 8 "1 Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, 2 because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, 4 in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit. "